Treatment of psoriasis. Part 1. Topical therapy and phototherapy

Decision points for the initiation of systemic treatment for psoriasis

Psoriasis has a tremendous effect on health-related quality of life. Phototherapy and systemic treatments are used for patients with more debilitating (physically and emotionally) forms of the disease. These treatments can be extremely effective but can also have potentially significant adverse effects. The decision to undertake systemic treatment of psoriasis is a complex one that requires both experience and judgment. With the recent advent of new biologic systemic drugs for moderate to severe psoriasis, the need to clarify patient candidates for systemic therapy has become very important. Here, we present a diagnostic algorithm and a formal measure, the Koo-Menter Psoriasis Instrument (KMPI), to aid in identifying patients that would benefit from systemic therapy. In addition, the KMPI can be used to document and justify treatment decisions for health care payers. While the decision to undertake systemic treatment and the choice of specific treatment plan must ultimately be made mutually by the patient and physician, these tools are designed to provide information that will be valuable in these determinations.

Curbing the psoriasis cascade. Therapies to minimize flares and frustration

Psoriasis, a T-cell-mediated disorder, affects 1% to 3% of the world's population. The characteristic lesions occur in many different forms, can cause significant discomfort and social distress, and in some instances, lead to dehydration and metabolic derangement. A chronic, unpredictable course and the necessity of periodically switching drugs or classes of drugs make psoriasis frustrating to treat. However, topical and systemic drug therapies and phototherapy can help minimize the exacerbations and prolong remissions. In this article, Dr Shenenberger outlines treatment approaches and discusses research into the use of immunomodulatory agents.

Calcipotriol/betamethasone dipropionate: a review of its use in the treatment of psoriasis vulgaris

The two-compound product containing calcipotriol 50 microg/g plus betamethasone dipropionate 0.5 mg/g (Dovobet, Daivobet) [referred to here as calcipotriol/betamethasone dipropionate], is a topical treatment for psoriasis vulgaris, combining a vitamin D analog and a corticosteroid. For most adult patients with psoriasis vulgaris on the trunk and limbs, up to 4 weeks of therapy with calcipotriol/betamethasone dipropionate provides an effective and well tolerated treatment. In clinical trials, patients with a mean baseline psoriasis area and severity index (PASI) of 9.5-10.9 experienced a mean 65.0-74.4% PASI improvement within 4 weeks, significantly better than improvements with calcipotriol 50 microg/g monotherapy, betamethasone dipropionate 0.5 mg/g monotherapy, or placebo. In addition, in 6.4%-20.1% of patients, lesions cleared. In patients who were subsequently treated with calcipotriol maintenance therapy, benefits were retained for at least 4 weeks. The safety of calcipotriol/betamethasone dipropionate in patients treated for up to 1 year was generally good; fewer than 5% of patients experienced adverse events possibly associated with long-term corticosteroid use.

Use of etanercept in the dermatology setting. A review

As psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis are chronic in nature, ideal treatment should have sustained efficacy, with minimal short- and long-term toxicities to allow lifelong treatment. Traditional therapies used for psoriatic arthritis or psoriasis, including phototherapies and systemic agents, do not satisfy these criteria. Ninety percent of patients surveyed in 1998 by The National Psoriasis Foundation were not satisfied with their treatment options. Several observations have supported the introduction of the tumor necrosis factor (TNF) antagonist etanercept as a treatment for psoriatic disease, including the failure of traditional therapies to meet patient needs, evidence that TNF plays a fundamental role in the inflammatory processes underlying psoriatic arthritis and psoriasis, and the safety and efficacy of this agent in other inflammatory, immune-mediated diseases, such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Etanercept prevents initiation of the proinflammatory cascade by competitively binding TNF. First indicated for RA, etanercept is also approved for the treatment of psoriatic arthritis, juvenile RA, ankylosing spondylitis, and most recently psoriasis. Etanercept provides dermatologists with a safe, effective, and convenient treatment option for patients with psoriatic arthritis and psoriasis, which can be used continuously with or without traditional therapies. The self-administered injections provide a distinct advantage over traditional therapies that often require frequent office visits and laboratory monitoring, and other biologic agents that require administration in the doctor's office. Dermatologists should be aware of the ongoing research with etanercept in psoriasis and other dermatologic conditions.

Integrating Biologic Agents into Management of Moderate-to-Severe Psoriasis: A Consensus of the Canadian Psoriasis Expert Panel

BACKGROUND

Approximately 2% of people worldwide have psoriasis, with as many as 1 million people with psoriasis in Canada alone.1,2 The severity of psoriasis ranges from mild to severe. It can lead to substantial morbidity and psychological stress and have a profound negative impact on patient quality of life.3,4 Although available therapies reduce therapies reduce the extent and severity of the disease and improve quality of life,3 reports have indicated a patient preference for more aggressive therapy and a dissatisfaction with the effectiveness of current treatment options.5

OBJECTIVE

A Canadian Expert Panel, comprising Canadian dermatologists, convened in Toronto on 27 February 2004 to reach a consensus on unmet needs of patients treated with current therapies and how to include the pending biologic agents in and improve the current treatment algorithm for moderate-to-severe psoriasis. Current treatment recommendations suggest a stepwise strategy starting with topical agents followed by phototherapy and then systemic agents.3,6,7 The Panel evaluated the appropriate positioning of the biologic agents, once approved by Health Canada, for the treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis.

METHODS

The Panel reviewed available evidence and quality of these data on current therapies and from randomized, controlled clinical trials.8-14 Subsequently, consensus was achieved by small-group workshops followed by plenary discussion.

RESULTS

The Panel determined that biologic agents are an important addition to therapies currently available for moderate-to-severe psoriasis and proposed an alternative treatment algorithm to the current step wise paradigm.

CONCLUSION

The Panel recommended a new treatment algorithm for moderate-to-severe psoriasis whereby all appropriate treatment options, including biologic agents, are considered together and patients' specific characteristics and needs are taken into account when selecting the most appropriate treatment option.

Psoriasis treatment: traditional therapy

Even before the recent development of biological agents, a long list of effective treatments has been available for patients with psoriasis. Topical therapies such as corticosteroids, vitamin D analogues, and retinoids are used for localised disease. Phototherapy including broadband ultraviolet B (UVB), narrowband UVB, PUVA, and climatotherapy are effective for more extensive disease. Systemic therapies such as methotrexate, retinoids, and ciclosporin are effective for patients with refractory or extensive cutaneous disease.

Pediatric psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis

Psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) are not uncommon among the pediatric population. Recognizing and treating these chronic disorders in children present unique challenges for the dermatologist. Paucity of clinical trials and a dearth of available treatment modalities, many of which carry significant risk or adverse effects, can make treating pediatric psoriasis and PsA a daunting task. This review attempts to define and consolidate the current state of knowledge with regards to this disease spectrum. The need for further clinical trials to investigate treatment options in the pediatric population is also discussed.

Overview of psoriasis

Psoriasis is a chronic disease that affects the skin and joints. Clinical hallmarks comprise erythematous plaques covered by silvery scaling and a chronic recurrent course. Histologically, psoriasis is characterized by the hyperproliferation of the epidermis, elongated and prominent blood vessels and a thick perivascular lymphocytic infiltrate. Psoriasis is now considered an auto-immune disease. Although many different therapies are available, there is clearly a need for new treatments. Our improvement of understanding of the pathogenesis of psoriasis together with the possibility to develop bioactive proteins ("biologicals") targeted at specific steps in the pathogenesis of psoriasis, have opened a new field of promising future treatments. In the development and assessment of new therapeutical modalities for psoriasis, a clear definition of a patient's psoriasis severity is essential. The impact of a given therapy can only then be evaluated, based on the changes in the severity score during and after application of the treatment.

Comparison of Tazarotene 0.1% Gel Plus Petrolatum Once Daily Versus Calcipotriol 0.005% Ointment Twice Daily in the Treatment of Plaque Psoriasis

Tazarotene and calcipotriol are both effective in the treatment of psoriasis. An investigator-blind, bilateral comparison of 44 lesion pairs in 19 patients was conducted to evaluate the efficacy, side effects and duration of therapeutic effects of once-daily tazarotene 0.1% gel plus petrolatum with twice-daily calcipotriol 0.005% ointment in plaque psoriasis. It consisted of a 12-week treatment phase, followed by a 4-week post-treatment observation phase. At the end of the treatment phase, tazarotene-petrolatum was as effective as calcipotriol in both objective and subjective overall efficacy assessment. Calcipotriol had a significantly greater effect in reducing erythema than tazarotene-petrolatum at weeks 2-8. At week 16, tazarotene-petrolatum demonstrated a significantly better maintenance effect in all parameters. Local irritation was noted only in tazarotene-petrolatum-treated lesions. Once-daily tazarotene 0.1% gel plus petrolatum was as effective as twice-daily calcipotriol 0.005% ointment in the treatment of plaque psoriasis, but had a better maintenance effect after the cessation of therapy.

The burden of illness associated with psoriasis: cost of treatment with systemic therapy and phototherapy in the US

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate utilization and direct healthcare expenditures among psoriasis patients treated with systemic therapy and phototherapy in the United States.

DESIGN

Cohort study using retrospective administrative medical claims.

PATIENTS

Psoriasis patients treated with systemic therapy and phototherapy, as well as a matched cohort of non-psoriasis patients. All patients were covered by employer-sponsored insurance between 1 April 1996 and 31 December 2000.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Estimated risk of hospitalization and total annual healthcare expenditures overall and by comorbidity status were compared for persons with psoriasis using systemic therapy or phototherapy and persons without psoriasis. Annualized utilization rates for hospitalizations, and use of emergency department, outpatient physician, outpatient laboratory, and outpatient pharmaceutical services were also compared across the two cohorts.

RESULTS

Seventeen percent of psoriasis patients were treated with systemic therapy or phototherapy. Patients with comorbid anemia, carcinoma, diabetes, depression, GI disorders, hepatotoxicity, hypertension, and nephrotoxicity had significantly higher expenditures than non-psoriasis patients with the same comorbidities (p < or =0.05). Elevated risk of hospitalization also contributed to higher expenditures in patients treated with systemic therapy or phototherapy. Limitations of this study include those inherent in using claims data such as dependence on diagnosis coding, the fact that psoriasis severity cannot be determined directly from claims data, confounding comorbidities, and the fact that only direct healthcare expenditures were considered in this analysis.

CONCLUSION

Psoriasis patients treated with systemic therapies/phototherapies have significantly more comorbidities and higher mean total healthcare expenditures compared to non-psoriasis patients. Psoriasis patients with selected comorbidities have significantly higher mean total healthcare expenditures compared to non-psoriasis persons with the same comorbidities.

Reduction of treatment frequency and UVA dose does not substantially compromise the antipsoriatic effect of oral psoralen-UVA

BACKGROUND

The carcinogenic potential of 8-methoxypsoralen photochemotherapy (psoralen-UVA [PUVA]) is correlated with the total number of treatments and cumulative UVA dose applied during oral PUVA therapy.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to determine whether reducing treatment frequency and UVA dose affects the therapeutic efficacy of oral PUVA for patients with chronic plaque psoriasis.

METHODS

This was a prospective, randomized, half-side study performed in a photodermatology department in a dermatology hospital. Eighteen consecutive patients with chronic plaque psoriasis received paired PUVA regimens (0.5 minimal phototoxic dose [MPD] 4 times/wk vs 1 MPD twice/wk, 0.5 MPD twice/wk vs 1 MPD twice/wk, and 0.5 MPD twice/wk vs 0.75 MPD twice/wk). The PUVA regimens were assessed for reduction of Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score and the number of treatments and cumulative UVA dose required to reduce PASI score to defined end points (ie, PASI reductions of 25%, 50%, and 75%) or to induce complete remission (PASI < 3).

RESULTS

Reducing the number of treatments while maintaining the same UVA dose per week did not reduce overall therapeutic efficacy. Reducing the number of treatments to twice a week and reducing the UVA dose from 1 MPD to 0.75 or 0.5 MPD per treatment only slightly affected intermediate therapeutic efficacy (between the second and seventh weeks of therapy) but had no effect on final clearance rates. The time to complete clearance did not significantly differ between regimens. The mean cumulative UVA dose was significantly lower for the least intensive dose regimen (0.5 MPD twice/wk) than for the more intensive regimens.

CONCLUSIONS

Reducing treatment frequency and UVA dose does not substantially compromise the therapeutic efficacy of PUVA.

Determinants of quality of life in patients with psoriasis: A study from the US population

BACKGROUND

Psoriasis is a common disease with substantial effects on quality of life. Few quality of life studies have been performed in psoriasis patients from the general US population.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the determinants of quality of life in psoriasis patients from the US population.

METHODS

Patients were randomly selected from the US population. Patients who identified themselves as having been diagnosed with psoriasis by a physician were invited to complete a more detailed survey about quality of life.

RESULTS

Two hundred sixty-six psoriasis patients from the US population completed the detailed survey. Body surface area showed the strongest association with decrements in quality of life (Spearman 0.50, P < .0001). Younger patients and female patients also had statistically significant reductions in quality of life. Increasing psoriasis severity was associated with seeking care from multiple physicians and having decrements in income.

CONCLUSION

Patients with more extensive skin involvement have greater reductions in quality of life. Female patients and young patients are affected to a greater extent.

Biological therapies in the systemic management of psoriasis: International Consensus Conference

Psoriasis is a chronic, immune-mediated disorder that usually requires long-term treatment for control. Approximately 25% of patients have moderate to severe disease and require phototherapy, systemic therapy or both. Despite the availability of numerous therapeutic options, the long-term management of psoriasis can be complicated by treatment-related limitations. With advances in molecular research and technology, several biological therapies are in various stages of development and approval for psoriasis. Biological therapies are designed to modulate key steps in the pathogenesis of psoriasis. Collectively, biologicals have been evaluated in thousands of patients with psoriasis and have demonstrated significant benefit with favourable safety and tolerability profiles. The limitations of current psoriasis therapies, the value of biological therapies for psoriasis, and guidance regarding the incorporation of biological therapies into clinical practice are discussed.

Calcipotriol versus coal tar: a prospective randomized study in stable plaque psoriasis

BACKGROUND

Topical therapies are the first line of treatment for patients with stable plaque psoriasis (SPP) affecting a limited body surface area. Very few trials comparing newer agents, such as 0.005% topical calcipotriol, with conventional modes of therapy, such as coal tar ointment, have been reported.

METHODS

A prospective, right-left randomized, investigator-blinded study with a 12-week treatment period and an 8-week follow-up period was performed. Thirty-six patients with nearly bilaterally symmetrical SPP lesions on the limbs were instructed to apply 5% coal tar ointment overnight on one side once daily and 0.005% calcipotriol ointment on the other side twice a day. All patients were advised to expose both sides to the sun for 2 h every day. Psoriatic lesions and progress during treatment were evaluated using the severity (0-3) scale of erythema, scaling and induration (ESI score). Evaluation was carried out every 2 weeks during the treatment period and monthly during follow-up. At the end of 12 weeks, patients with > 75% reduction in the ESI score were considered to be markedly improved, those with 51-75% reduction to be moderately improved, those with 26-50% reduction to be minimally improved and those with < 25% to be non-responders. Self-assessment by the patients regarding the efficacy and acceptability of the two modalities was on a five-point scale. Serum calcium, serum phosphate, total and differential serum proteins, 24-h urinary calcium and phosphate were monitored both at baseline and after completion of therapy.

RESULTS

Thirty of the 36 recruited patients completed the study. The difference in clinical response between the two sides was statistically significant at 4, 6 and 8 weeks, with the percentage reduction in ESI score with calcipotriol being 65.7 +/- 12.2% compared with 45.8 +/- 16.6% with coal tar at 8 weeks (P < 0.01, t = 6.4). However, the difference in clinical response at 10 and 12 weeks between the two sides was not significant, with a mean reduction of 71.9 +/- 13.3% in ESI score on the calcipotriol-treated side compared with 69.4 +/- 15.4% with coal tar ointment (P > 0.05). In the follow-up period of 8 weeks, recurrence of lesions was noted in 10% of patients treated with calcipotriol compared with 16.7% in those treated with coal tar after an average period of 6 +/- 1.2 and 5 +/- 1.3 weeks, respectively (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

It was found that 0.005% calcipotriol ointment produced a faster initial response and had better cosmetic acceptability in patients, although after a long period of treatment, i.e. 12 weeks, 5% coal tar ointment had comparable efficacy. There was no statistically significant difference in the relapse rates between the two modalities.

CD4+ T cell-associated pathophysiology critically depends on CD18 gene dose effects in a murine model of psoriasis

In a CD18 hypomorphic polygenic PL/J mouse model, the severe reduction of CD18 (beta(2) integrin) to 2-16% of wild-type levels leads to the development of a psoriasiform skin disease. In this study, we analyzed the influence of reduced CD18 gene expression on T cell function, and its contribution to the pathogenesis of this disease. Both CD4(+) and CD8(+) T cells were significantly increased in the skin of affected CD18 hypomorphic mice. But only depletion of CD4(+) T cells, and not the removal of CD8(+) T cells, resulted in a complete clearance of the psoriasiform dermatitis. This indicates a central role of CD4(+) T cells in the pathogenesis of this disorder, further supported by the detection of several Th1-like cytokines released predominantly by CD4(+) T cells. In contrast to the CD18 hypomorphic mice, CD18 null mutants of the same strain did not develop the psoriasiform dermatitis. This is in part due to a lack of T cell emigration from dermal blood vessels, as experimental allergic contact dermatitis could be induced in CD18 hypomorphic and wild-type mice, but not in CD18 null mutants. Hence, 2-16% of CD18 gene expression is obviously sufficient for T cell emigration driving the inflammatory phenotype in CD18 hypomorphic mice. Our data suggest that the pathogenic involvement of CD4(+) T cells depends on a gene dose effect with a reduced expression of the CD18 protein in PL/J mice. This murine inflammatory skin model may also have relevance for human polygenic inflammatory diseases.

Combination therapy to treat moderate to severe psoriasis

In patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis, remission can be difficult to achieve and sustain. Both acutely acting and long-term maintenance agents are needed. Speed and efficiency of available monotherapies tend to be inversely proportional to safety. Combination, rotational, and sequential approaches are often more effective and safer than single-agent therapy. Combining agents with complementary adverse effect profiles is preferable. Apparent synergistic enhancement is seen with most paired combinations of the four major therapies: acitretin, phototherapy (ultraviolet B/psoralen plus ultraviolet A), cyclosporine, and methotrexate. Of those, only cyclosporine in combination with psoralen plus ultraviolet A is contraindicated because of increased cancer risk. Combinations of each of those major therapies with topical agents (retinoids, steroids, vitamin D derivatives, and others) have been used with varying efficacy and safety. The immunomodulators, hydroxyurea and thioguanine, have also shown some success in combination therapy. The new biologic agents with their novel modes of action and adverse effect profiles may prove to be important adjuncts in combination/rotational/sequential approaches. In some cases, monotherapy (with either systemic agents or phototherapy) adequately controls moderate to severe disease. A regimen using a single agent has the advantages of lower cost and greater adherence by the patient. For any number of reasons, however, including loss of efficacy, adverse effects, or cumulative or acute toxicity-and especially the inability to clear resistant lesions-a single modality will not be adequate. Using two or more therapies is thus the rule rather than the exception for most patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis, but picking a combination that serves to balance safety and efficacy needs careful consideration, especially since no evidence-based treatment guidelines exist.

Methotrexate versus cyclosporine in moderate-to-severe chronic plaque psoriasis

BACKGROUND

Methotrexate and cyclosporine are well-known systemic therapies for moderate-to-severe chronic plaque psoriasis. We conducted a randomized, controlled trial comparing methotrexate and cyclosporine in terms of effectiveness, side effects, and the quality of life.

METHODS

A total of 88 patients with moderate-to-severe psoriasis were randomly assigned to treatment for 16 weeks with either methotrexate (44 patients; initial dose, 15 mg per week) or cyclosporine (44 patients; initial dose, 3 mg per kilogram of body weight per day) and were followed for another 36 weeks. The primary outcome was the difference between groups in the psoriasis area-and-severity index after 16 weeks of treatment, after adjustment for base-line values; scores were determined in a blinded fashion by trained observers.

RESULTS

Two patients were excluded from the analysis after randomization because they were found to be ineligible, and one patient withdrew his consent. Twelve patients in the methotrexate group had to discontinue treatment because of reversible elevations in liver-enzyme levels, and 1 patient in the cyclosporine group had to do so because of an elevation in the bilirubin level, but all 13 were included in the analysis. After 16 weeks of treatment, the mean (+/-SE) score for the psoriasis area-and-severity index decreased from 13.4+/-3.6 at base line to 5.0+/-0.7 among 43 patients treated with methotrexate, whereas the score decreased from 14.0+/-6.6 to 3.8+/-0.5 among 42 patients treated with cyclosporine. After adjustment for base-line values, the mean absolute difference in values at 16 weeks was 1.3 (95 percent confidence interval, -0.2 to 2.8; P=0.09). The physician's global assessment of the extent of psoriasis, the time to and the rates of remission, and the quality of life were similar in the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

No significant differences in efficacy were found between methotrexate and cyclosporine for the treatment of moderate-to-severe psoriasis.

Development and use of alefacept to treat psoriasis

Activated memory T cells, expressing CD2, are key components in the pathogenesis of psoriasis. Alefacept binds to CD2, blocks co-stimulatory signaling, and selectively induces apoptosis of pathogenic T cells. Our objective is to present safety and efficacy results which lead to the new drug application (NDA) of alefacept for the treatment of psoriasis. We reviewed the key phase II and III trials in over 1300 patients and found that during treatment and follow-up of patients receiving 12 weekly intramuscular or intravenous injections of alefacept, about 1/3 will achieve a reduction in psoriasis area and severity index (PASI) of > or =75% and nearly 2/3 a reduction in PASI of > or =50%. Patients who achieved a > or =75% reduction from baseline PASI during or after a single course maintained a > or =50% reduction in PASI for a median duration of >7 months. Among patients who received 2 courses of alefacept, 40% and 71% of patients achieved a > or =75% and > or =50% reduction in PASI, respectively and duration of effect was prolonged. Adverse events in the placebo and active treatment arms did not differ. We conclude that alefacept significantly improves psoriasis and produces durable clinical improvement with a very favorable safety profile.

Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors in cutaneous biology

Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors (PPARs) are ligand-activated transcription factors that regulate the expression of target genes involved in many cellular functions including cell proliferation, differentiation and immune/inflammation response. The PPAR subfamily consists of three isotypes: PPAR alpha, PPAR beta/delta and PPAR gamma, which have all been identified in keratinocytes. PPAR beta/delta is the predominant subtype in human keratinocytes, whereas PPAR alpha and PPAR gamma are expressed at much lower levels and increase significantly upon keratinocyte differentiation. PPAR beta/delta is not linked to differentiation, but is significantly upregulated upon various conditions that result in keratinocyte proliferation, and during skin wound healing. In vitro and in vivo evidence suggests that PPARs appear to play an important role in skin barrier permeability, inhibiting epidermal cell growth, promoting epidermal terminal differentiation and regulating skin inflammatory response by diverse mechanisms. These proprieties are pointing in the direction of PPARs being key regulators of skin conditions characterized by hyperproliferation, inflammatory infiltrates and aberrant differentiation such as psoriasis, but may also have clinical implications in inflammatory skin disease (e.g. atopic dermatitis), proliferative skin disease, wound healing, acne and protease inhibitor associated lipodystrophia.

The use of 0.25% zinc pyrithione spray does not enhance the efficacy of clobetasol propionate 0.05% foam in the treatment of psoriasis

BACKGROUND

It was discovered that Skin Cap (Cheminova Internacional S.A., Madrid, Spain), an over-the-counter psoriasis therapy with zinc pyrithione, contained clobetasol propionate and it was withdrawn from the market by the US Food and Drug Administration review. Some suggested that there might be a synergistic effect of zinc pyrithione with clobetasol propionate.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to evaluate the efficacy of clobetasol propionate 0.05% foam with and without the coadministration of a topical 0.25% zinc pyrithione spray in treating psoriasis involving sites other than the scalp.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized, double-blind, right/left study of patients with mild to moderate, generally symmetric, plaque-type psoriasis. Patients were assigned to treatment with clobetasol propionate foam on all psoriatic lesions and then randomly assigned to use zinc pyrithione spray to either the right or left side of their body (vehicle spray to be applied to the opposite side). There was a 2-week treatment phase (visits at baseline, week 1, and week 2) and a follow-up phase (visit at week 4), and all treatments were administered twice daily for 2 weeks. The primary outcome measure was the change from baseline to week 2 in the composite score of the signs of psoriasis (erythema, scaling, plaque thickness) for symmetric target lesions.

RESULTS

A total of 25 patients were enrolled; 24 completed the trial and 1 was lost to follow up. Of those who completed the study, 63% (15 of 24) were men, and the mean age (+/-SD) was 50 years (+/-12.2). After 2 weeks of therapy, the average decline in the composite score was 3.5 (+/-1.8) for monotherapy (clobetasol propionate foam and vehicle) and, similarly, 3.3 (+/-1.8) for clobetasol propionate foam plus zinc pyrithione spray (P =.5).

DISCUSSION

Zinc pyrithione spray does not appear to enhance the efficacy of clobetasol propionate foam after 2 weeks of therapy.

Photometric and clinical assessment of localized UVB phototherapy systems for the high-dosage treatment of stable plaque psoriasis

BACKGROUND

Ultraviolet-B (UVB) light sources are widely used for the safe and effective treatment of inflammatory skin conditions. The recent commercial introduction of fiber-coupled UVB phototherapy systems facilitates the selective exposure and treatment of localized psoriasis plaques while permitting the safe use of high-dosage treatments.

OBJECTIVE

In this study, the performance characteristics and clinical outcome of psoriasis treatments were assessed when using two technologically distinct sources of high-intensity, fiber-optically delivered therapeutic UVB.

METHODS

A pulsed, monochromatic 308 nm excimer laser and a continuous-wave, incoherent UVB light source were compared using photosensitive recording papers, images captured with a CCD camera, and on the healthy and lesional skin of ten psoriasis patients.

RESULTS

Beam profile analyses and minimal erythema dose (MED) test spots revealed distinct energy distribution patterns from the two devices. The Guassian-type laser beam energy distribution complicated MED determinations, whereas skin exposed to light from the incoherent UVB system developed a more uniform erythema. Both systems cleared the treated psoriasis plaques equivalently, requiring no more than two to five weeks of high-dose treatments.

CONCLUSION

When used at equally erythemogenic high doses, both systems produced rapid plaque clearance with minimal side effects. Unlike conventional phototherapy, localized UVB minimizes exposure to the healthy skin, making it suitable for patients with mild to moderate psoriasis, individuals with recalcitrant plaques and for the successful treatment of lesions occurring on most body sites.

Practical management of psoriasis in the elderly: epidemiology, clinical aspects, quality of life, patient education and treatment options

Psoriasis in the elderly will constitute a significant challenge for the practising physician in this new millennium. Special considerations for the elderly include drug-induced or drug-aggravated psoriasis, especially for patients receiving polypharmacy or with recent worsening or poor response to conventional therapy. Other frequently encountered forms of psoriasis in the elderly include psoriatic arthritis and its complications, inverse psoriasis and potentially life-threatening complications such as erythrodermic or acute pustular psoriasis, where early recognition and systemic therapy is critical. Faced with an array of topical and systemic drug therapy options, it is of paramount importance that the physician remains focused on the holistic management of the patient, in order to achieve optimal compliance and benefit. This can be achieved through careful attention to quality-of-life issues, especially since many elderly patients may have other medical, social and economic comorbidities that can further negatively affect their overall quality of life. It is also essential that the severity of psoriasis be assessed on a more balanced, holistic scale that incorporates both physical and psychological parameters, such as the Salford Psoriasis Index. The patient and caregiver education should be multi-faceted, regularly conducted and practically orientated. Treatment goals should be kept simple and individualised for each patient, based on concomitant comorbidities, potential adverse effects, existing quality of life, self-care capability, drug history, caregiver situation, financial needs, feasibility for follow-up and patient's preferences. Topically applied medications, such as topical corticosteroids, salicylic acid, tar and dithranol preparations, calcipotriol and tazarotene, are the favoured first-line therapeutic options in the elderly. Narrowband ultraviolet B phototherapy is also well established as a standard therapy for psoriasis. Systemic therapy with agents such as methotrexate, acitretin and cyclosporin should be judiciously reserved for severe, extensive cases in view of their lower therapeutic index in the elderly. The ambulatory psoriasis treatment centre is an integral part of the overall cost-effective management of patients with psoriasis that can function as a 'one-stop' treatment and resource centre for the elderly patient.

Selective targeting of T cell subsets: focus on alefacept - a remittive therapy for psoriasis

Psoriasis is an immune-mediated disease in which memory-effector (CD45RO+), skin-homing T cells play a key role in driving the disease process. Available therapies are often poorly tolerated, none are curative and most only suppress disease symptoms without attacking the underlying cause of the illness. Alefacept (Ameviv, Biogen, Inc.) is a fully human lymphocyte function associated antigen-3/immunoglobulin G1 fusion protein that targets memory-effector T cells by binding CD2 on the T cell and Fc phi receptor III IgG receptors on accessory cells, thereby preventing T cell activation and proliferation and causing selective T cell apoptosis. To date, alefacept has been studied in moderate-to-severe chronic plaque psoriasis and in a pilot study of psoriatic arthritis. In chronic plaque psoriasis, alefacept produced significant and sustained improvements in psoriasis symptoms. There was no evidence of disease rebound or worsening of psoriasis following treatment cessation. Multiple courses provided consistent efficacy, with a trend for more rapid and greater clinical improvement in subsequent courses. Alefacept reduced circulating CD4+ and CD8+ memory-effector T cells, with relatively no change in naive (CD45RA+) T cells or B cells. Alefacept also reduced IFN-phi-secreting Tcells in lesional biopsies of psoriatic skin. These reductions all correlated with the observed clinical effect. Alefacept was well-tolerated throughout these studies, with a side effect profile similar to placebo. There was no evidence of generalised immunosuppression or increased risk of infection or malignancy. Alefacept did not alter the primary or acquired immune response in psoriatic patients. Clinical data obtained to date support the use of alefacept as a safe and remittive therapy for psoriasis.